High-Profile Sexual Abuse Epidemic

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by blankall

Trump was never on the island. Trump also distanced himself from Epstein earlier than a lot of other people. Not because he's a good guy, but because they butted heads. Specifically the quote you are talking about is from 2002. Trump and Epstein fell out in 2004, after competing for the same piece of real estate. Epstein wasn't arrested, for his first set of crimes, until 2005.

Upon what information do you base your comment that Trump was never on the island? You don’t know this for a fact.

The indictment for Maxwell references acts between 1994 and 1997. Trump may be innocent, but there was plenty of opportunity for Trump to be involved with Epstein prior to the fallout you mention in 2004.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/us/gh...ein/index.html

[wwkayaker]

Originally Posted by WhiteTiger

Hopefully she doesn't "hang herself" in jail, too...

She may “hang herself” in jail but why would individuals concerned about her knowledge have waited to kill her until she was apprehended. Epstein’s arrest may have been a surprise to his sex crimes buddies but the pursuit and (expected) arrest of Maxwell shouldn’t have been a stretch to their imaginations. Certainly she could have been killed before she had a chance to tell all.

Another poster mentioned that powerful individuals could have bought her silence. Wasn’t Maxwell quite wealthy due to inheriting her Dad’s theft of his company’s pension funds?

After reading many sources and listening to some podcasts on Epstein’s death, I don’t believe he committed suicide but was murdered. I don’t think Maxwell has the same fate.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by wwkayaker

Upon what information do you base your comment that Trump was never on the island? You don’t know this for a fact.

The indictment for Maxwell references acts between 1994 and 1997. Trump may be innocent, but there was plenty of opportunity for Trump to be involved with Epstein prior to the fallout you mention in 2004.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/02/us/gh...ein/index.html

Fine. There's no evidence this far that Trump was on the island. We have witnessed placing Clinton there.

[FlamesAddiction]

There is no shortage of high profile people that have been known to associate with Epstein and Maxwell. I wouldn't be surprised if Clinton and/or Trump were up to no good though. Neither have a great reputation.

[Bill Bumface]

I just hope Bill Gates is the good guy I think he is.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I just hope Bill Gates is the good guy I think he is.

If we can't trust a ruthless billionaire who tried to create a tech monopoly, who can we trust?

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Matata

If we can't trust a ruthless billionaire who tried to create a tech monopoly, who can we trust?

I don't think anyone becomes a billionaire without stepping on some toes as it probably does take a degree of ruthlessness to be successful in big business. Does business conduct necessarily define a person? I don't know. However after finding out what "America's Dad" was capable of I don't think we can ever assume that any celebrity or elite rich person is above committing heinous crimes regardless of their public image.

[Matata]

[MarchHare]

Haven't Bill and Melinda Gates committed to giving away 99% of their accumulated wealth upon the deaths? I don't really see an issue with their personal fortune growing at a rate faster than their charity foundation so long as they follow through with their promise to give almost everything away eventually.

That said, if I were in Bill's position I'd want to see first-hand the benefits of my philanthropy come to fruition before my death, so perhaps he has plans to accelerate contributions to his foundation as he gets older?

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Matata

Paradox????...

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Haven't Bill and Melinda Gates committed to giving away 99% of their accumulated wealth upon the deaths? I don't really see an issue with their personal fortune growing at a rate faster than their charity foundation so long as they follow through with their promise to give almost everything away eventually.

Just a quick comment in regards to this.

Why does it matter if they do or don't? It's their money. They're not obligated to do anything with it.

They're contributed more to charity than the many contributions of companies and individuals could combined. They have done more than asked (or expected) of them.

[TorqueDog]

Ghislaine Maxwell's Hide Out
"Night Club"

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by Joborule

Just a quick comment in regards to this.

Why does it matter if they do or don't? It's their money. They're not obligated to do anything with it.

It matters because they voluntarily chose to make a very public commitment to give 99% of their wealth away, and Bill's personal reputation was rehabilitated from being seen as a ruthless monopolist who acquired his fortune through shady business practices to the world's most influential philanthropist specifically because of that public commitment. I have absolutely no reason to think Bill and Melinda Gates are being deceptive and are secretly planning to renege on their donation pledge, but if they did, would you not have a problem with their public image benefiting from a promise they had no intention of keeping?

[Joborule]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

It matters because they voluntarily chose to make a very public commitment to give 99% of their wealth away, and Bill's personal reputation was rehabilitated from being seen as a ruthless monopolist who acquired his fortune through shady business practices to the world's most influential philanthropist specifically because of that public commitment. I have absolutely no reason to think Bill and Melinda Gates are being deceptive and are secretly planning to renege on their donation pledge, but if they did, would you not have a problem with their public image benefiting from a promise they had no intention of keeping?

It would bother me if they lied to get what they want, because it would poison the well so to speak for other philanthropists whom may make similar gestures and proclamations, but they're not legally bound to give away the money. In the end of the day, what is there's they can chose to do with, and are fully within their rights in doing it. Which is why I asked the question, but I see your point in why it would be an issue.

[Matata]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Paradox????...

Looks like his microsoft stock is worth nearly $70B of his current $110B and he's given "tens of billions" away during this time. He's not coasting on Microsoft stock and giving money away, he's finding ways to get his money back and then some.


It's incredibly impressive that he's made $40B outside of Microsoft, that fortune alone would make him the 20th richest person in the world.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Anyone who's followed the Epstein stuff over the years knows Alan Dershowitz is guilty as hell, and he all but confirms it here.



https://spectator.us/ghislaine-maxwe...an-dershowitz/

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Anyone who's followed the Epstein stuff over the years knows Alan Dershowitz is guilty as hell, and he all but confirms it here.



https://spectator.us/ghislaine-maxwe...an-dershowitz/

I wonder what the strategy is here. Just defending Epstein makes him seem guiltier. The obvious gut reaction is that Dershowitz is guilty himself of something awful and needs to go all in on Epstein's defence to defend himself?

I get the whole innocent until proven guilty thing, but the evidence of Epstein's wrongdoing goes well beyond 2 women. There was also the plethora of women who came forward at the time of his first set of criminal charges. So regardless of how innocent Epstein is this time, he was definitely guilty last time and was able to weasel himself out of proper punishment. Maybe Dershowitz didn't know the extent of Epstein's previous wrongdoings (doubtful), but why run to his support now?

[MoneyGuy]

Pay your employees well, provide good benefits, and pay your taxes and I don’t care how much money you have. I like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett is one of my favourite people.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Matata

Looks like his microsoft stock is worth nearly $70B of his current $110B and he's given "tens of billions" away during this time. He's not coasting on Microsoft stock and giving money away, he's finding ways to get his money back and then some.


It's incredibly impressive that he's made $40B outside of Microsoft, that fortune alone would make him the 20th richest person in the world.

Yeah but, the guy is a tech mogul with money to burn. It doesn’t matter that he doesn’t own all of Microsoft. He’s been one of the richest people in the world for as long as I can even remember. It’s not some kind of mystery that he can’t give his money away fast enough, when his domain has consistently been the fastest growing industry, for decades.

[opendoor]

It's not rocket science. When you direct let's say 3-5% of your net worth to charity per year, but you and your foundation are heavily invested in equities and companies that have been growing at 10-40% a year for the last 5-10 years, obviously your net worth is going to increase in that span.